Comments

When we talk about encounters, it sounds like the RTS portion of the game has the character "building" things (kennels, etc.) and facing an encounter with another "base".

When you have a game called "Wildman" seems like "building stuff" (kennels) is kinda the opposite thing I would think of someone doing who was called "wildman"... I mean beating people over the head with a bone would be par for the course, but methodically preparing a siege by building defensive structures or being a "hunter gatherer" and stockpiling resources so i might micromanage my resources (kennels and whatnot) just doesn't seem to fit the tone of a game called Wildman (IMHO)

Secondly, lets assume you build and update these structures, then enter an encounter, and win. What happens to these structures now that you have conquered this new territory...or, more generally, as you expand your "empire" are you going to have to constantly scroll back over the areas you have previously conquered to maintain your resources (kennels, etc.)... if that is the case, it would seem that as you progress through the game, it will become more and more about "micromanaging" (as you will have to continuously pan to areas you have conquered to maintain the resources you've built throughout your conquest) and less about the ARPG... and that just seems unfun to me. (perhaps there is a ready solution to this problem (i.e. the structures you build can get "cashed in" or converted back into resources when an encounter is finished).

That was great! I love learning about the process. It was interesting to see how the ideas build off of one another and get an idea on game progression. So excited about this game and the vision. Never any doubt in backing this game. Hope others will jump on get this game KICKSTARTED!

Before I really had no idea how that was going to work and was just putting my faith in the you guys because I know what you're capable of. But now I think i get where you're coming from with this 'with rts elements' business and that sounds pretty cool. I like the idea of having a tactics/systems based approach to unit control. I've probably missed this but will their be resources and such to focus map control?

Looking great, Chris. This is exactly what I thought it would be from your first interviews and descriptions. Glad I was on the same page because it sounds like it will be a TON of fun! Looking forward to hearing more detail. And I hope this video helps sway more people that might have been on the fence.

@Kristian, thank you for sharing the link to this video. I immediately gave it a strong plug on both facebook and my LinkedIn group Puget Sound Video Game Developers Support (btw, if anyone who reads this comment is a developer in the Puget Sound area, then please join and help support those in our region through your active participation).

@Chris Taylor, thank you for the Matt Chat video interview. When you said in your interview that you could talk all day about your time in the industry, I'm envisioning a PBS pledge drive with the volunteers taking calls to support the fine programming and telephones ringing off the hooks in the background. Fortunately, the pledge-taking is already happening through Kickstarter. The live petitioning is almost what needs to happen, though. I wish that I could give you the means to accomplish a video pledge drive that, while perhaps not as important as helping people in third world countries, is just as important aesthetically as some PBS programming. The most I can envision is if you had some kind of live video stream of what's happening there at the office that could be linked to the Kickstarter. Maybe a video feed at someone's desk who is at the heart of the project during meeting times. Then just have someone on hand running commentary to fill in the virtual audience occasionally on what is going on or a little event ticker that runs across the bottom of the feed to fill in anyone just joining in. Some of it might even make great footage for a making of video. It might get more backing as everyone sees your team hard at work despite a distracting video feed.

Excellent in-depth explanation, this goes to show how much you can visualize, using only a pen and a sketchbook.
In other news, Matt Barton has recently uploaded his interview with Chris Taylor, it's on youtube: "Matt Chat 182: Chris Taylor on the Fall of Gas Powered Games" http://www.youtube.com/watch…Could you please attach a link to this on the next project update: we need to spread the word!

Honestly, before, I though this looked pretty cool, Gas Powered Games, what could go wrong? I see this video and...now...I'm now pretty f'ing excited. Your explanation somehow made the concept click for me, and now I really really want to play this game. Best of luck, guys.

One of the most exciting parts of evolution (at least for me) is finding the reasons why things (creatures) turn out the way they do. It's Darwin's law, survival of the fittest. Useful characteristics (like opposable thumbs) will develop because they give the species an advantage. But it also means that useless characteristics (e.g. hind legs on a dolphiin) will devolve because otherwise they would consume valuable energy without benefiting the creature, decreasing its fitness and leading to its extinction (but you already knew that).
I find this concept of limited energy or resources very interesting and I think it would make for a great element in this game, meaning you would always make a definite choice as to which technology you chose because you can not have everything.
Another way to implement it could be to, in addition to the player's active choices, improve the technolgoies the player uses a lot while degrading the technologies he does not use often.
Also, development/upgrading of e.g. the kennels could mean improving the dogs' controllability but at the cost of some "wildness" (attack power), again irreversably.
Either way would create lots of interesting "what if" scenarios which might also improve replay value while also making balancing easier. SInce it would be about fit-ness (in the sense of the word), there would be no real levels, just different states. A beginning player with just a bunch of raw, wild wolves could vaporize a seasoned player who already has 10 evolutionary upgrades on his dogs, which might be able to open their own food cans but just can't deal with raw attack power.
Just like a tiny virus can kill a man. The beauty of nature.

@Cerno B: I dropped (but returned later on) during a period where GPG did several days no updates and really few comments in comments section. I first address such things verbally (I did) and if it gets not changed or explained properly (for selfish me), I vote with my feet (and money). It's about signalling for me and being consequent. As updates and communication recently changed for the better, I returned. We will see how it develops from here on - I might increase my pledge, I might leave again.

13 people sounds pretty sweet. I feared that it was more like 3 people with no chance of getting new content out in a timely manner.

To my mind it would be of utmost importance to work on some in-game footage that looks great and gives a feeling of how the game will play. It does not have to be playable, but should look awesome. Just look at Planetary Annihilation. Instant hit, but nothing to show than a prerendered concept video.

Oh and by the way, have you tried pulling some favors from industry friends, especially ones with successful kickstarter projects? They could generate some more publicity among the kickstarter crowd who dropped you from their radar.

I wonder why the pledges kept stagnating these past few days. Is there a public holiday somewhere? It seems strange since from reading the comments, I would assume that interest in the game is picking up. Could it be that after the layoff news, some backers pull out of the game, while at the same time people join the project? If that is the case, I wonder why people drop out. Unless they smell a scam (for whatever reason), there would not be anything gained from dropping out. Since you don't lose anything from pledging a failed project, sometimes I have the feeling that people act as if they did.

@qvark I believe Chris Taylor's goals for Wildman aren't unrealistic and can be done, even with the shorter staffed development team. Unfortunately, in the world of game development, publishers can make or break companies. Just take a look at Obsidian and the B.S. they've dealt with over the years from publishers pulling out of projects at the last minute for no apparent reason.

The thing is, game publishers change management all the time and what may have been a great business idea or plan for one manager may not be for the next. When this happens the financial consequences can be tremendous for a game developer who spent a ton of money into creating something and then have the rug pulled out right under them.

This is the very reason you see companies turning to Kickstarter and I commend them. In addition, the digital distribution age is actually a good thing in my book. Perhaps we can get more game developers into positions where the risk is lowered and the rewards are higher.

I think there will always be a place for publishers but it is important that game developers have more choices so they can mitigate the risks involved with new IPs or business in general. Nobody ever enjoys laying people off and the type of comradery found in the game development world is second to none. I know Chris Taylor didn't enjoy letting people go but he had no choice. I'm happy that a few folks have the option to take a risk and stay on.

Now we need more people to back the game to support this great company and its employees. However, let me be clear on something. We should back this game mainly because it's a good idea and is exciting. I know Chris doesn't want a pity party so keep that in mind. Do it for the right reasons.

At present we have about 13 people, and that includes IT, HR and OPS working on Wildman... and yes, that also includes all those who came in with the understanding that they are risking some of their severance (and possibly next week, their PTO).

@qvark Reportedly half the dev team stayed on as volunteers until the campaign is done, at which time, if successful they, along with any others who are willing to come back, will be rehired. Its not a one man project.

I really liked the concept of playing a stone age character, that's why I backed this project. Tbh the latest update mostly sound like and 'idea man' thing. There is only some notes on a paper and nothing else, there is not even a team that can make this idea reality anymore. As much as I loved TA, you should probably let Gaspowered games file for bankruptcy and start a new company.

Your idea sounds awesome and totally unique! When I pledged, I had no idea what this game is all about. My only intention was to support Gas Powered Game. But, now that I understand that you are making some thing new and awesome, I cannot wait to play Wildman!
In future updates, please give us some more info on how war works (especially level of soldiers/creep control) and how will the multiplayer take part in this system. Keep up the good work and totally waiting for your next update!

I like the evolved Dinosaurs.Reminds me of Harry Harrison's West of Eden.
Going by the original art I would love for my Wildman to ride a Sabre Tooth Tiger and have the ability to strike from its back with my melee weapons and bow.

@Bert,
"But if those new features somehow seem to be a great idea, that might improve the quality of the gameplay, why not?"

I would hope (and from what Chris has shown in this update, it looks like) they would have a design doc already written up. Adding new things on the fly poses two problems:
1) Feature Creep.
2) You're adding tiers just to get more donations, which could potential blow your budget for rewards to a level of crit mass.
Take for example the DFA project: after the episode where Tim announced that they would have to cut things, people were posting inane stuff like "if you cut anything, I will drop my pledge" and "don't cut anything, I am sure you will find creative ways around it". Not everything can make it into the game, for a variety of reasons. Good ideas get cut all the time for the greater good. Other stuff doesn't even make it past pre-production. All the new video update features are (98% of the time) not going to be new stuff they just thought up on the spot, I can pretty safely assure you just from past examples of dev cycles.

Thank you for the video. This clears a lot of things up and I appreciate you going through all of it. It would be really great to get an in-depth look at certain places on this concept. It reminds me of C&C Generals Zero Hour when you faced off against opposing Generals who all had a special ace up their sleeve which you had to tactically outsmart them for the victory. Also reminds me of Red Alert 3's Uprising where you gain the new tech after each win, loved it and can't wait for this game! Question though, what will limit the player from building up a lot of buildings to outnumber their opponent, is there attrition or a limit to it?

Good presentation of your design. Now please "zoom in" and explain the war zone gameplay in just as much detail. I'm rather worried that it's gonna be "plonk down five buildings from a limited selection and wait to see if you win".

Is there gonna be resource management during the battle? Which kind of tactics will you be able to use to adapt to your opponent's strategy? What are gonna be the key skills needed to win a battle, especially against superior odds? All those are questions that really need to be answered.

Whoever is reading this, if you haven't backed this game by now, hurry up and do so. Chris Taylor is an excellent designer and really knows how to make this concept come to life. After watching this video, I became even more excited. It sounds like a lot of fun.

_This_ is what I like and why I want Wildman to happen. Dota is old to me, it's so built around the minutiae of doing the same things on the same map over and over again, it's boring. Wildman promises to evolve the genre with a campaign and a narrative (however ARPG-ish) that will help me _engage_ with the game.